Russian History Data/Texts
This page is aimed at materials reflecting the official Russian historiography through making analyses and summaries of the main process in development of the Russian statehood from point of view of Moscow-centred Russia. It will differ from the asymmetric Russian history, which is cited from sources which are not sharing the views on Moscow-centred historiography.
Also, it has been said that Russia is the only country which plans its history. Such an activity took place after the collapse of the Soviet Union, which was a country with low-key national history writing, if such an exaggeration is allowed. The same menthality took also in the former Central Asian Union Repaublics, which were part of Russian Federation more than 100 years. But, only partly in Caucasus region, where the nations have been part of Russia more some 200 years.
The Baltic states were only some 20 twenty years with the Soviet Union part of Russia. The indenpendent historiography was restored with from parents and grand-parents or through taking the old books from hidden bookselves and archives. Belarus and Ukraine, also the Novgorod Republic as well as Dacia Princepality and Kievan Rus' are such parts of Russian history, which has nowadays also other ways of writing it in comparison with the old Moscow-centred historiography. Today, in Eastern Europe, there are more than one school of Russian history.
For these upcoming different views, historiography has been divided into two sections: Coherent Russian history as it is writte and Asymmetric Russian history which comprises different historiographic traditions being shared with other staheholders and intressents of Russian past, present and future.
/datafiles/userfiles/History of Russia/Black Holes and Asymmetries in Russian Historiography.pptx
"Black Holes and Asymmetries in Russian Historiography - Managing Black Holes and Asymmetries" -presentation 20.03.2015 in Political Sciences Annual Conference in Åbo Akademi, in Finland:
This PowerPoint presentation outlines time concept in society and describes the reality Russians live in society in terms of time span. One should always zero his/her reality and time span dimensions when crossing the Russian state borders or making history-related analyses about different cultures.
In addition, social philosophy differs from country to country, where the state structure and basic values in political life may differs radically. Russia has never gone such a period of time in social development from the end of 18th century/19th century to the present in terms of development of social values impacting on formation of state structure like "The Constitution Development and codification of human rights/law and order principles in society. Russia has had its own development path.
In historiography, this past development is visible particularly in differences in historiography compared with the Western Europe. The traditions differ from 1) documentation of religion/church history, 2) from the Gothic historiography, which resulted in secular chronicles in Kievan Rus' and Moscow-driven development of contemporary Russia as Western Europe, 3) the third tradition, the Annalistic method from the 20th century was almost non-existing in historiography due to tsarist censorship and control of socialistic USSR regime.
The modern practices in writing political history differs from the Western countries in many terms. The Soviet Science and technology driven management of society differed from the western one in terms of concept of science. Science was not an independent institution, but it was harnessed to built up the first socialistic state. One should be very critical when using the Soviet era history and even today's contemporary Russian history and mass media information about event ´s going on in the world.